Removal of old projects from fedorahosted.

[Mike McGrath]

On Tue, 9 Sep 2008, Jeremy Katz wrote:

> On Tue, 2008-09-09 at 21:20 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote:
> > I don't see why that project would get removed.  I really think I'm
> > getting misunderstood here.
>
> I think that part of the misunderstanding is that I don't see "six
> months" as equivalent to "stale".  We're not even to the seven year
> point of RHEL 2.1.  And there are definitely things that I personally
> migrated from elvis -> fedorahosted that, while not relevant with
> "current" distros still are for older RHEL.
>
> > 1) we send an email to the group members explaining their project is stale
> > and asking to remove it.
> > 2) they respond saying they'd like to not have it removed. (it stays)
>
> It stays for how long?  If we look at the set of what's being talked
> about here, I can already tell you that the vast majority are going to
> fall into the "wanting to be kept" category.  Which means that we're
> doing a lot of administrative overhead for how much gain?
>

Till they say otherwise or until the board says to take it down.

> > 3) they respond saying its no longer used and it can be removed (we remove
> > it or they move it elsewhere)
> > 4) no one responds (it gets removed)
>
> Within what time period?  And if it later becomes relevant/needed again
> we just hope that someone has a backup?
>

Yep, its well documented and if thats not ok for them, there's other
offerings out there.  I will not let our offering become another
sourceforge and become the butt of every packagers jokes.

Bottom line, hosting isn't what _WE_ do.  its a value added service and
I'm keeping that well in mind.  As far as administrative overhead.  I've
spent far more time on sending emails about it then it took for us to run
the scripts and contact the hosts.

fedorahosted != elvis
fedorahosted != sourceforge

If you want elvis, you can put your stuff there.

	-Mike